Chas sent me this observation that Prairiemary made to a discussion group on the ethics of "Creative Nonfiction" (I guess that's what I write, mostly). It is so good that I will reproduce it whole (though I have put a particular sore point in bold- face).
"Another factor to consider in this discussion is editors, particularly when one is writing about the West. At the recent Montana Festival of the Book, an author recounted bitterly how he had had events actually
changed by his back east female editor. He was NOT a romantic type guy putting in airs and graces. He had reported that he and his buddies had had a good day hunting and then sat around the campfire to
eat coq au vin and wild rice they had brought along. The editor INSISTED that he had to change that because no real "macho" men would eat that way. She wanted them to put grouse -- that they had killed
while hunting -- on a spit and roast them over the fire. In vain did the author, a very literal minded engineer, say, "But we ARE macho and that's what we really DID eat!"
"Her reply was, "Look, you signed a contract and this is OUR writing now."
"Others reported similar incidents. We seem to have a lot of editors out there who are frustrated writers. When they don't even know the subject matter, it's a disaster. Which is why we need Western presses."
I might also mention that some of the best editors I have had, like Jim Babb at the "new" Gray's, Ed Gray at the old one, Nick Lyons, and Tom McIntyre, have been real writers with no frustrations to make them rewrite my copy-- only interesting suggestions.
Prairiemary and I have also been having an interesting conversation on keeping wild animals. When it develops it too may lead to a post.
No comments:
Post a Comment